Consent?

Check under the Abuse topic. There are discussions like this one that talk about consent.

I don't recommend walking around in the abuse category. Maybe I'm a little weak when it comes to how much terrible stuff I can read before I want to shove pencils in my eyes. YMMV

This one is specifically related to consent. I found it in the BDSM category. http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=493146

I'm sure there's more discussions available.

consent is paramount and foundational. "ruining" a sexual fantasy for an evening is insignificant compared to, say, ruining a life.

any kind of play that involves an unequal power dynamic should be discussed beforehand. oh, and if can't make asking for and receiving consent sexy you have no business having sex.

Gianbattista said:

Thank you Lord Steve

What about how you relate this to other aspects of your 'you ness'? Are you generally courteous in other aspects of life? Do you, for example, earn your income, or feel entitled to take it with out consent? Can you think of an aspect of life where consent is not applicable?

I am in in a head spiral and need to find a way out of my own thought experiment, but I am trying so hard not to lead a conversation to argue for or against either side of my own head argument!

Click to expand...

i am extremely polite (except on the internet) especially when i'm in a situation that involves a power dynamic. for example, i go out of my way to treat waiters and other service people well because i know that their financial future hangs in the balance.

i "earn" my income, i guess. i'll spare yall a lecture on how Communism Will Win etc but i am engaged in a consensual and reciprocal relationship with my employer. when i write for money, i do so knowing that i am offering a service, the value of which has been agreed upon by my client.

consent is the sine qua non of human fulfillment, in my experience.

since this is a bdsm forum, i will add that the deliberate and vocal surrender of control from sub to dom is more intimate and profound than any actual violence.

Consent is a tool to control the consequences of your actions. Not more. Not less.

Primalex said:

Consent is a tool to control the consequences of your actions. Not more. Not less.

Click to expand...

maybe it is... [gasping, genuine shock] you who is the tool???

thx for checking in with your anti-zen dom-logic though

Gianbattista said:

Thank you. Your political views seen and appreciated by me as part of your 'essence' . I really, sincerely appreciate your answers. you sound really interesting, I'm even more keen you should stick around ( and hope we can put political differences aside, I love to have friends of different strong beliefs, so I hope you don't mind that mine are different )

Can I ask one more based on them?

Why for you is Internet conversation different to other interaction you have?

Click to expand...

the anonymity afforded by the internet can be useful as a tool of social censure. i believe in the utility of public humiliation and restorative justice, and i enjoy Owning people in a way that is fun and interesting. creeps and moral delinquents should, in my opinion, get dunked on.

in other words, i'm rude online because i seek out conflict in a way that isn't available IRL. if i could parachute into a gathering of neo-nazis and insult them without being immediately killed, i would do so. online the fuckers can't touch me.

Lord_Steve said:

maybe it is... [gasping, genuine shock] you who is the tool???

thx for checking in with your anti-zen dom-logic though

Click to expand...

It kinda makes sense though. Don't want to abuse your partner? Don't want to go to jail for assault? Get clear consent first. I mean we don't get consent first because it's ordained by God, or for some kind of spiritual awakening, or to evoke something. We do it so we have a desired result, or desired consequences. An enthusiastic willing partner is a consequence of getting consent.

SpunThings said:

It kinda makes sense though. Don't want to abuse your partner? Don't want to go to jail for assault? Get clear consent first. I mean we don't get consent first because it's ordained by God, or for some kind of spiritual awakening, or to evoke something. We do it so we have a desired result, or desired consequences. An enthusiastic willing partner is a consequence of getting consent.

Click to expand...

consent isn't a "tool" so much as it is an necessary precondition. if your partner wants to send you to jail for assault, you have fucked up irrevocably. asking for consent isn't ordained by God, it is ordained by the personhood of the person you are fucking. we ask for consent because we care for our partners, not because we are trying to facilitate kinky sex.

I never act without consent and would never ask anybody to do so. In hockey for example you enter into the game with the understanding that you will eventually get checked, yet seeing as there's no established rules stating that they can't, under your full understanding of such your choosing to play denotes consent. Fighting in hockey is also a possibility yet there are rules against instigation, so as fighting is an accepted action, it is not without the consent of both players. This is where the difference lies. Consent requires the mutual knowledge and acceptance of the rules by both partners. If not achieved it's a violation of contract. Rules of contract legally have to be agreed upon, and cannot be changed without the consent of both parties. If one partner doesn't agree to the terms that effectively terminates the contract.

No, thank you, I appreciate the opportunity

Gianbattista said:

would you rephrase this or explain or expand it for me please?

Click to expand...

We are results of a certain culture. For example, we see marriage as a union of two individuals who decide that they want to spend their lives together. A lot of people in the world will agree, but you will find a lot of f.e. East Asians who will go:"結婚是兩個家庭的事, 不是兩個人的事!!!" which basically means:"Marriage is about two families, not two people!!!"

So, relationships are governed by the culture they happen in. We tend to look down on other cultures and call them archaic or barbaric, which is a long tradition of humankind, yet they are valid societies. The culture permeates everything - education, expectation, even laws, that it's hard to challenge them without becoming an outcast.

And from there on, we can safely assume that any culture sees certain duties or obligations for the persons in a relationship. Even in our "free" Western culture the concept of "The man is responsible for providing the means for food and shelter." is very strong.

And now we can start to bridge the gap with two simple question:
"Why would I need consent to do something that is my cultural duty, obligation or right?"
"Is it still consent if I was raised to consent and my consent is seriously based upon the unconscious fear of becoming a social outcast?"


You can see the culture in all the answers here:
"You request consent because you love your partner." The concept of having a partner that wasn't even chosen by us or the concept that we do not request consent, exactly because we love our partner, is alien to us.

"You request consent because you end up in jail otherwise." So what? Look at any society where culture and laws clash and you will see that culture regularly wins. If it his cultural duty to kill someone, he will do it. This is the most prominent cultural clash, because honor killings end up in newspapers. If it is her cultural duty to spread her legs and just bite into the next pillow, she will do it - and no newspaper will write about it. We request consent where as part of our culture it is appropriate to ask for consent. We do so to match our actions with the cultural expectations of our actions. We don't request consent because we love or because a law said so, we do request because we want to be accepted in the society we are living in; the society of the family, neighborhood, state and country.

Gianbattista said:

May I ask further.....your point about arranged marriage, is it your experience or supposition that love and arranged marriage are mutually exclusive? In these circumstances would consent be more or less important? Or equally so?

Click to expand...

They are not mutually exclusive and love is more than attraction on first sight. For consent, it does not play any role. It was merely an example about cultural differences that is easier to grasp.

to you consent is a societal issue. To be acceptable in societal norms, not those of any relationship? Is that right?

Click to expand...

In essence, yes. Why do you think you are equal and are entitled to the same rights as everyone else? Because this is what your society told you. But what if you would have grown up in the caste system of India? To be worth less than someone else would be as natural and "obvious" for you as your belief now that this is not the case.

Like the others, may I ask if you apply this thought to other aspects of your life?

Click to expand...

Is there a choice? This is closely rated to the concept of free will, which I'm basically required to refute as a dominant. If I have no control over the will of someone, then all my results are merely the result of good luck.

Simple example:
I ask you to pick either the red or black panties. You choose the black panties. You would say it was your free choice.

Now I erase your memory of your choice and send us back in time. Then I ask you again. And you choose the black panties again. If I do this 1000 times and you choose 1000 times the black panties because 1000 times you have made the very same thoughts and you came to the very same conclusions like "red is too naughty today" - where is the free will? Although in theory you could choose the red panties, you won't. You will never. Why would you make a different choice if the premise is always the same? Free will is what *I* observe as outside person who does not know whether you pick red or black.

Primalex said:

Is there a choice? This is closely rated to the concept of free will, which I'm basically required to refute as a dominant.

Click to expand...

Now whose irony detector is broken?

Lord_Steve said:

i am extremely polite (except on the internet) especially when i'm in a situation that involves a power dynamic. for example, i go out of my way to treat waiters and other service people well because i know that their financial future hangs in the balance.

i "earn" my income, i guess. i'll spare yall a lecture on how Communism Will Win etc but i am engaged in a consensual and reciprocal relationship with my employer. when i write for money, i do so knowing that i am offering a service, the value of which has been agreed upon by my client.

consent is the sine qua non of human fulfillment, in my experience.

since this is a bdsm forum, i will add that the deliberate and vocal surrender of control from sub to dom is more intimate and profound than any actual violence.

Click to expand...

I like this. I feel very similarly in regards to power exchange and power dynamics.

Consent is what separates what we do from the actual oppression that so many face, and I believe that through consent you're turning the oppression that is intrinsic in our power structures on it's ear and subverting it, whether you're a top/bottom/sub/dom/me. As long as you have the cultural and political awareness to go along with your kink, I think it can be a subversive act for sure, at least in it's ideal form.

richard_daily said:

I like this. I feel very similarly in regards to power exchange and power dynamics.

Consent is what separates what we do from the actual oppression that so many face, and I believe that through consent you're turning the oppression that is intrinsic in our power structures on it's ear and subverting it, whether you're a top/bottom/sub/dom/me. As long as you have the cultural and political awareness to go along with your kink, I think it can be a subversive act for sure, at least in it's ideal form.

Click to expand...

agreed! i mean primalex can witter about cultural relativism and his weirdly calvinist theories of predetermination all he likes. in an everyday, utilitarian context, consent is essential. period, full stop.